Empathy and Commitment as the Basis for Trust
In Philoctetes by Sophocles, Odysseus commands Neoptolemos to abandon justice and base a relationship with Philoctetes on dishonesty to gain his trust and ultimately his bow. However, Neoptolemos acknowledges a similar burden plagues Philoctetes that becomes the basis of trust between them. Neoptolemos attempts to reconcile with Odysseus’ orders by stealing the bow and abandoning Philoctetes. Unable to fulfill the orders, Neoptolemos returns to Philoctetes indicating his commitment and his lack of trust with the Atreidai. Therefore, Sophocles challenges that trust is based on empathy and commitment as evident in Philoctetes’ and Neoptolemos’ relationship.
Empathy forms the basis for trust to exist between Neoptolemos and Philoctetes.
Neoptolemos encounters Philoctetes and recounts the injustice committed by Odysseus and the Greeks against him as “You monsters-you have dared to give to someone/other than me/the arms that by rights are my own” in order to gain his trust and steal his bow (ln.365-367). Neoptolemus’ initial portrayal of the hierarchy of the Atreidai as “monsters” represents the inhuman and untrustworthy nature of leaders such as Odysseus. It is difficult for human beings to establish a common ground to trust one another; whereas with “monsters” alienation devastates the existence of any common ground. Neoptolemos’ description reflects his alienation with Greeks and Odysseus. The Atreidai and Odysseus define their values as unjust and based apathy by denying Neoptolemos “the arms that by rights are [his]”. Odysseus’ entrustment of the armor Hephaestus crafted for Achilles and not Neoptolemos reflects the Atreidai’s lack of respect for sacred belongings and obligations ...
... middle of paper ...
...towing upon him Herakles’ bow. Philoctetes is able to empathize with Neoptolemos’ loss of his father’s armor by becoming a surrogate father. The two men are able to understand one another based on the grief devised by the Greeks. Neoptolemos’ growing concern for Philoctetes’ wellbeing indicates the presence of commitment. Neoptolemos refuses to sever the bond Philoctetes has with his bow and repents for his loss of justice and shame. Neoptolemos’ indicates his commitment to Philoctetes preservation physically and in honor, by opposing the Greeks. In turn, Philoctetes promises to defend Skyros with his life. Commitment is evident between the two men as sacrifice and support unite them. The empathy and the commitment secure the foundation of trust between Philoctetes and Neoptolemos. Trust requires effort and mutual understanding for it to exist between human beings.
Throughout Aristophanes’ “Clouds” there is a constant battle between old and new. It makes itself apparent in the Just and Unjust speech as well as between father and son. Ultimately, Pheidippides, whom would be considered ‘new’, triumphs over the old Strepsiades, his father. This is analogous to the Just and Unjust speech. In this debate, Just speech represents the old traditions and mores of Greece while the contrasting Unjust speech is considered to be newfangled and cynical towards the old. While the defeat of Just speech by Unjust speech does not render Pheidippides the ability to overcome Strepsiades, it is a parallel that may be compared with many other instances in Mythology and real life.
In Philoctetes, the character of Odysseus is portrayed as well accustomed to using deceit for personal gain without much consideration for morality or human compassion. He not only deceives Philoctetes himself, but he has the audacity to con Neoptolemus, the son of Achilles, into doing the same. Odysseus's first deception of Philoctetes happens before his second arrival on Lemnos with Neoptolemus. Odysseus and his crew maroon the injured Philoctetes on the island with no one to help him by sneaking away while he is asleep. Odysseus explains their reasons for abandoning him:
In recent times, kind acts are often made because influence, benefits, or other selfish alterior motives. Another opinion of mind would be that things aren't just done out of spontaneous action but implied or commanded. The 7th President of United States quoted precisely," It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their own selfish purposes."(Corruption Quotes). This is relevent to one of the areas of discussion in this essay. I want analyze the moral standards or lack there of between The Gods in Odyssey and recent politicial values. Also, I want to discuss the morality of the men vs woman in odyssey being displayed toward Penelope in the absence of Odyseus. Furthermore, how she was catergorized
Of all the heroic traits such as honor and glory, given to the reader through Homer’s epic poems loyalty seems to be the strongest, as with Patroclus in the Iliad, so it is with Penelope, Telemachus, and Eumaeus in the Odyssey. Through the use of these characters loyalty is demonstrated to Odysseus, the hero if the poem. Their undying loyalty and devotion to the warring hero gives perfect examples of how humans should act to those they claim to be faithful too.
The Greek interpretation of what makes a man “civilized” and what makes him “savage” is a recurring theme throughout the ancient epics, battle narratives, and dramas, including Aeschylus’ Agamemnon. In this first installment of The Oresteia, the chorus of Argive elders expresses keen outrage at the killing of Agamemnon, which suggests that they equate savagery with the madness they see in Clytemnestra: “just as your mind is maddened by the bloody deed, the blood-fleck in your eyes is clear to see” (1426-1427). In many places throughout the play, however, Clytemnestra proves that she does not fit the description of savage that is defined in Homer’s literature, for example and instead gives evidence that she is a very complex, rational woman. The chorus ignores the many admirable qualities of their queen —her skill at running the estate and her compassion for those who have suffered, among other things— simply because she is a woman. These qualities may not entirely excuse Clytemnestra from taking a life, but they combine to form a more noble picture of the queen than the chorus chooses to portray. Clytemnestra has relatable motives and displays empathy and respect for many different people, including the husband who she just killed, which sets her apart from the classical Greek definition of a savage —a designation forced on Clytemnestra by the chorus, but not necessarily to be believed.
Glory is a reward often granted to those who go bravely into the face of adversity. To be glorified is not something that should be vilified; however, the active pursuit of it is difficult to define as anything other than selfish and egotistical. When fleeing the cave of Polyphemus, Odysseus felt it necessary to taunt the monster whom he had so narrowly escaped: “Cyclops, if anyone, any mortal man, asks how you got your eye put out, tell him that Odysseus the marauder did it, son of Laertes, whose home is on Ithaca” (437). All that this earned Odysseus was a curse backed by the wrath of Poseidon and a boulder hurled his way. In this instance, Odysseus’ words could only serve himself. The only glory Odysseus could have attained was a figment of his own imagination. By praising himself, by wagging his self-proclaimed might in the face of his adversary, he had accomplished nothing other than endangering his crew and delaying their return to
Odysseus is known as a great war hero and leader who encounters and conquers unimaginable obstacles in his quest to return to Ithaca. This is understandable, given that Homer often uses Odysseus’ point of view in recounting his tortuous ten-year journey. However, beneath the surface is another perspective that is often overlooked, namely, that of Odysseus’ men who accompany him on this journey. Odysseus often glosses over his shortcomings as a leader and accentuates or even exaggerates his successes. If his men had been given more of a voice, it is likely that a different account of Odysseus’ leadership qualities would have been presented. For instance, Odysseus takes great pains to portray himself as an innocent victim and Homer’s readers generally accept this perspective. Odysseus’ hubris makes him careless when it comes to the safety of his men and therefore, an unreliable leader. Careful analysis of the scenes featuring Cicones, Aeolus and the Winds, and Scylla and Charybdis reveals that Odysseus often fails to transcend his own self-interest and ultimately he is the one responsible for the deaths of his men.
The King and Queen happily welcome Telemachos into their home as they can recognize his relationship to Odysseus by his clear physical resemblance to him. In the household of King Menelaus, Telemachos is told the account of Odysseus and the Trojan horse. Odysseus cunningly dressed himself as a beggar to infiltrate Troy and brought through the Trojan horse, actually full of warriors ready to attack within the city’s walls. Further, this story adds to the character development and description of Odysseus as it portrays his masterful success. While Telemachos is in Sparta, Odysseus starts his ‘nostos’ or journey home. In ancient Greece, when a man of Odysseus’ high character leaves for war or to complete a heroic act he is expected to return home and earn his ‘nostos,’ which is the Greek word to express the honorable and proud return back to one’s own
In Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War, Pericles commends the ergon of Athenian heroes, which has placed them in the realm of logos, while directing the Athenians to follow these ideals of logos. The maintenance and continued success of Athens' political establishment relies on the prevalence of polis, rationality and discourse over family, emotion and reckless action. However, the indiscriminate turns of fate and fortune, often place logos in opposition with the base, primal nature of ergon. Both Thucydides and Sophocles recognize that when logos conflicts with the unexpected ergon, the preservation of rationality and unanimity among the citizens of the polis depend on the leadership of a single honest leader. In the History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides presents Pericles as a man of logos, whom Athens needs to achieve its full potential as an empire and later to rescue her from disaster. Likewise, Sophocles presents Theseus, in Oedipus Colonus, as the perfect successor of Pericles, who returns Athens to its former glory before the end of the war. In these two examples, we see that the dominance of logos over ergon within a polis lies in the ability and logos of the city’s current leader.
Homer's two central heroes, Odysseus and Achilles, are in many ways differing manifestations of the same themes. While Achilles' character is almost utterly consistent in his rage, pride, and near divinity, Odysseus' character is difficult to pin down to a single moral; though perhaps more human than Achilles, he remains more difficult to understand. Nevertheless, both heroes are defined not by their appearances, nor by the impressions they leave upon the minds of those around them, nor even so much by the words they speak, but almost entirely by their actions. Action is what drives the plot of both the Iliad and the Odyssey, and action is what holds the characters together. In this respect, the theme of humanity is revealed in both Odysseus and Achilles: man is a combination of his will, his actions, and his relationship to the divine. This blend allows Homer to divulge all that is human in his characters, and all that is a vehicle for the idyllic aspects of ancient Greek society. Accordingly, the apparent inconsistencies in the characterization of Odysseus can be accounted for by his spiritual distance from the god-like Achilles; Achilles is more coherent because he is the son of a god. This is not to say that Achilles is not at times petty or unimaginative, but that his standards of action are merely more continuous through time. Nevertheless, both of Homer's heroes embody important and admirable facets of ancient Greek culture, though they fracture in the ways they are represented.
Although it may seem hard to believe, it is fairly difficult to develop empathy for those who do not belong a part of our own ingroup. Outgroup empathy can be analyzed through a study conducted by Dr. Judith Arroyo in which a group of non-Hispanic White psychotherapists was shown two mock interview videos. Each video was identical in that they each depicted a woman, roughly in her 30s, with depression and other signs of social problems due to family troubles. In the first video, interestingly, the woman was portrayed as a non-Hispanic White woman with a typical English accent, and the same woman was portrayed with a darkened skin tone and Hispanic accent when speaking English. The study’s focus was to assess the influence of ethnicity on the
Odysseus is unique among epic heroes in that his strength comes not from inhuman powers or exceptional physical ability, but mainly from his mind. Odysseus, regularly uses cunning, guile, and superiority of intellect to overcome obstacles. In this paper I will compare Odysseus to other epic heroes, both in terms of character and in terms of responses to crises, comparing his reactions with those of other heroes placed in similar situations.
Victories in battle gained the Homeric hero honour in the eyes of their fellow aristoi; however, this was not enough to exhibit their triumphs. ‘… [T]here appears to be a close equation between honour… and the possession of a ‘prize’… ’ (Block 1, p. 50), as success in battle could be forgot, the heroes materialised these victories within the prizes taken as the spoils of war. These prizes provided a lasting symbol of their achievements; therefore, their importance was immense. We see this importance demonstrated in the way Agamemnon is determined to retain Chryseis, his ‘trophy’, saying to her father, ‘The girl I will not give back…’ (Iliad, 1.29). She is the embodiment of his honour, manifested in the flesh. When forced to give her back to her father, Agamemnon’s symbol of honour is gone and his pride is wounded. This dishonour may even jeopardise his position as leader of the Greek army and explains why he demands another man’s ‘prize’.
Murray, Robert D. Jr. ?Sophocles? Moral Themes.? In Readings on Sophocles, edited by Don Nardo. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 1997.
Empathy is when I am able to feel or share feelings with another person. In order to do this, to truly do this I would have to had live through exactly they did or had some telepathic emotional connection to them. Only, our minds aren’t designed this way, we can’t truly ever feel real empathy. I can’t even begin to imagine know what it would take to really feel empathy and the emotions it would give me. Empathy doesn’t really doesn’t really exist; there is no way to actually feel what another person is going through, the closest we can come to empathy is visualizing another person’s perspective, in other words, I don’t agree with Wallace that empathy is the most important thing to learn in college, how to care is.